|
i'm sorry to say bob but your bolded inline comments clearly show what i wrote went over your head.
just to highlight some of what you missed. although i don't know how you did.
artists give consent to play they're music on the radio, knowing and accepting that people will record it onto cassette, and maybe even make a mix tape for their special someone without having to pay royalties. releasing a cd has the same implications.
maybe you don't think live performance is an art, i happen to think it's pretty cool.
the riaa and copyright law don't see a difference between learning to play a song and digital copies of art. maybe you're forgetting there was a ban on online tabulator sites, even if people transposed it by ear. and it's illegal to perform someone else's copyrighted work, even if you're not charging and don't profit. it is also illegal to play a song you've purchased on cd or whatever for a group of people without explicit consent from the copyright holder. i still think you need a little background before you argue something you know little about.
as far as capitalism, a digital copy, even ones you download for money on itunes do not have value, it's the network and transportation of a digital copy that has value. if a digital copy had value, and i've said this before, but that must have gone over your head too, if a digital copy had value, then buying music on amazon that's drm-free would cost MORE than music purchased with drm. because purchasing DRM free music means quite literally that you intend to make digital copies. please read this paragraph and think about it before responding. it's important that you not just read, but understand the words and their relationship to each other before you respond.
you're painting things with a very broad brush and trying to oversimplify a very complex issue, you're the only one that thinks this is a black and white issue.
theft is taking something that someone else owns. nobody owns a digital copy, that's silly, and you've previously agreed with that when you said that it should not be illegal to copy music from a cd you purchased to your ipod for convenience.
how can you possibly believe that's not theft of a digital copy, it's unauthorized reproduction of the art according to you. Do you think you're purchasing the copyrights when you buy a cd? cause you're not. your blind instistance that a digital copy has value, while at the same time deciding sometimes digital copies don't have value is a massive contradiction in your logic and statements. and why your model is completely impractical.
in fact you're agreeing with me in your last paragraph that because digital copies are not inherently self limiting, we have to change the fuckin model. It's changed before, it's not a big deal, it'll change several more times as society evolves. we all get a little afraid sometimes of change, but it's ok, life is gonna be ok.
shady? not everything i post is about you or talking to you, sometimes i just want to clarify myself you dill pickle. furthermore that confusion you feel is the emerging epiphany that i'm actually right floating up against your skull, instead of fighting it, accept it, it'll lower your blood pressure.
|